Replies

"LOL, you don't seem to get the point. I've asked you three times now to define the difference and you won't."

I have directly answered it each time you've asked. It is not entirely my fault that you dislike the answer so much that you are pretending I never gave it. Certainly, you must actually understand it after all since you then you on in your next paragraph to draw conclusions from the answer I gave. And they appear to be the correct conclusions.

"By your logic, Putin could come over here, marry an American woman (who is a citizen), bear a child with her. then take him back to Russia and raise him to be a communist and an enemy of the US. Teach him how to undermine everything America stands for and how to become POTUS, send him back to the US to accomplish his dirty deed."

Ignoring that the kid would also have to live here for 14 years, be 35 years old, win his parties party nomination after a grueling season of primaries, and then win the general election... yes. That would be absolutely true.

"He wins, are you going to sit here and tell every one on this forum that his spawn would be a Natural Born Citizen and eligible for POTUS?"

Of course. Because unlike you I actually care what the Constitution says and would never be so disloyal to my nation as to try and overturn the Constitution to frustrate an election result I did not like. I do not know if you have served or not, but I took an oath to defend the Constitution, and not just when my side wins.

EW You are a MORON.

If what you say is true, then why did Obama need THIS to be passed?

“This is the html version of the file http://www.jcics.org/natural%20born%20summary%20(word).doc.
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

Natural Born Citizen Act Summary

PURPOSE: To define the term “natural born Citizen” as used in the Constitution to include three categories:

(1) Any person born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,

(2) Any person born outside the United States to a U.S. citizen parent or parents who are eligible to transmit citizenship, and

(3) Any person adopted by the age of 18 by a U.S. citizen parent or parents who are otherwise eligible to transmit citizenship to a biological child.

This bill is intended to clarify the term and end uncertainty about the eligibility requirements to run for the Office of the Presidency. The definition of this term is an issue that has been debated in legal circles for years and has never been ruled on by the courts. Clarification is needed before this becomes a real issue. Congress should be the institution that defines this term, not the courts.

Congressional Authority:

In the absence of a judicial interpretation of Constitutional language, Congress can express a legislative interpretation of Constitutional terms. A federal court would likely give great deference to Congress’ interpretation. The Congress also has broad authority regarding issues of citizenship. Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution grants authority to Congress to “establish a uniform rule of naturalization.” Several federal judicial decisions recognize Congress’ plenary powers regarding issues pertaining to citizenship that do not specifically fit under the Fourteenth Amendment. Notably Rogers v. Bellei (401 US 815) and US v. Wong Kim Ark (169 US 649) say that Congress has the power to regulate matters pertaining to citizenship not specifically defined by the Fourteenth Amendment.

In addition, Congress has previously used their naturalization power to define the term “natural born” as used in a statute. In the Naturalization Act of 1790 Congress defined “natural born” to include children born abroad to citizen parents. Although the language was not kept in later naturalization laws, that specific language was not challenged.

Persons Born Outside the United States to Citizen Parents:

This bill clarifies that the term “natural born Citizen” includes children born outside the United States to citizen parents. This provision provides comfort and certainty to members of the American military and foreign services, as well as expatriate families, that their children, too, are eligible to run for president. These children are no less qualified than children born on American soil, and they should not be treated differently. Of course, children born to American citizens abroad would only be eligible to run for president if they satisfied the fourteen year residency requirement in addition to the “natural born” requirement.

Support for the position that the term “natural born Citizen” should include children born outside the United States to citizen parents is particularly well articulated in a law review article by Jill A. Pryor entitled The Natural-Born Citizen Clause and Presidential Eligibility: An Approach for Resolving Two Hundred Years of Uncertainty. This article argues that “any person with a right to American citizenship under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States at the time of his or her birth is a natural-born citizen for purposes of presidential eligibility.”

Persons Adopted by Age 18 by a Citizen Parent:

This bill also ensures that children adopted by citizen parents, who are full-fledged members of American families are treated the same as if they were the biological children of American parents born abroad. Under adoption law, adopted children are to be treated as natural issue of their adoptive parents. They are to be accorded the same rights, duties and responsibilities as biological children. They are being raised by Americans in America. Adopted children of American citizens should be allowed the same opportunity as biological children to pursue all their dreams. They should be afforded the chance to give back to this country by serving in its highest office.”